Surgical endoscopy · 2014
Laparoscopic versus open surgical management of small bowel obstruction: an analysis of short-term outcomes.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Saleh Fady, Ambrosini Luciano, Jackson Timothy, Okrainec Allan
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopy in acute care surgery continues to expand. While adhesive small bowel obstruction (SBO) has traditionally been managed via an open approach, appropriately selected patients may benefit from laparoscopy. The objective of our study was to compare short-term postoperative outcomes in patients with adhesive SBO treated with laparotomy versus laparoscopy.
METHODS: Using the ACS NSQIP participant use files (2005-10), patients with a postoperative diagnosis of adhesive SBO were selected for inclusion in this study. Patients with bowel resections or concomitant procedures were excluded. Both univariate analyses and multivariate logistic regression were performed to compare 30-day outcomes in the open and laparoscopic groups.
RESULTS: A total of 4,616 patients with adhesive SBO were identified: 3,697 (80.1%) and 919 (19.3%) in the open and laparoscopic groups, respectively. Mean operative time was similar in both groups. The mortality and overall complications were 84 (2.3%) and 819 (22.2%), respectively, in the open group compared to 7 (0.8%) and 81 (8.8%) in the laparoscopic group, with respective unadjusted odds ratios (ORs) of 0.33 (0.13-0.71, P < 0.01) and 0.39 (0.30-0.49, P < 0.01). The adjusted OR for overall complications was 0.46 (0.37-0.59, P < 0.01) favouring the laparoscopic group. The mean postoperative length of stay (LOS) was 8.4 days compared to 3.8 in the open and laparoscopic groups, respectively (P < 0.01).
CONCLUSION: The laparoscopic approach to treating adhesive SBO resulted in significantly fewer complications and shorter LOS.
METHODS: Using the ACS NSQIP participant use files (2005-10), patients with a postoperative diagnosis of adhesive SBO were selected for inclusion in this study. Patients with bowel resections or concomitant procedures were excluded. Both univariate analyses and multivariate logistic regression were performed to compare 30-day outcomes in the open and laparoscopic groups.
RESULTS: A total of 4,616 patients with adhesive SBO were identified: 3,697 (80.1%) and 919 (19.3%) in the open and laparoscopic groups, respectively. Mean operative time was similar in both groups. The mortality and overall complications were 84 (2.3%) and 819 (22.2%), respectively, in the open group compared to 7 (0.8%) and 81 (8.8%) in the laparoscopic group, with respective unadjusted odds ratios (ORs) of 0.33 (0.13-0.71, P < 0.01) and 0.39 (0.30-0.49, P < 0.01). The adjusted OR for overall complications was 0.46 (0.37-0.59, P < 0.01) favouring the laparoscopic group. The mean postoperative length of stay (LOS) was 8.4 days compared to 3.8 in the open and laparoscopic groups, respectively (P < 0.01).
CONCLUSION: The laparoscopic approach to treating adhesive SBO resulted in significantly fewer complications and shorter LOS.